Continued from the Zumwalt thread.
I have been somewhat reluctant to get into a more substantive discussion on the subject of the significance of the upgrades that had gone onto Flight III because it is OT and maybe these discussions should be moved to the Burke/Flight III thread. I am not interested in a conversation on whether Flight III is a new class or not but I do share Kwai's opinion that the changes there are incorporated into Flight III are more significant relative to earlier Flight changes. I am interested though in your view and how you get to the conclusion that the changes from Type 052C to get to Type 052D are more significant comparatively. I would be interested in the metrics that you have applied to get to your conclusion.
Well, the structural modifications for Flight III Burke from Flight IIA are all essentially to allow the ship to accomodate the SPY-6, with upgrades in the combat management system, and increasing the electrical power generation capacity slightly as well to provide enough juice for the SPY-6s (3 x 3 MW generators replaced by 3 x 4 MW generators).
In other words, I see the sum of the structural changes and subsystem improvement changes between Flight IIA to Flight III as mostly related to the new AMDR it will host. As far as I understand there is minimal structural change to the bow or the aft of the ship (most of the changes appear to be limited to amidships near the superstructure), there will also be no modification of the ship's armament in any way between Flight IIA and III.
In other words, I think this picture quite accurately boils down the core changes between Flight IIA and III, and all the structural changes and upgrades in combat management etc are made in accordance to the changes listed here.
Between 052C and 052D on the other hand, there were major changes in structure, sensors and electronics, armament, all around the ship.
Structure:
-a completely different main superstructure/deckhouse to 052C
-change in bow hull structure/bulkheads to accommodate the new VLS and the new 130mm gun which replaces the old VLS and the old 100mm gun
-change in aft hull structure at where the old YJ-62 AShM launchers once were, and replaced them with a VLS block which entered "down" through the hull that would have required substantial modification and organization of the decks and bulkheads below.
-change of the entire aft hangar superstructure, not only changing the geometry of the hangar itself (now centreline instead of port), but also integrating the RHIB launch positions into the hangar superstructure to be more stealthy as well, compared to 052C
-and other minor changes such as modifying the Type 517M radar's position, changing the position of the decoy rocket launchers, etc.
Sensors and electronics:
-the most obvious change is the upgrade from the Type 346 to much larger and flat Type 346A
-integration of a new VDS in the aft hull
-expected (but not yet confirmed) -- a new generation of combat management system and CIC compared to 052C [I can appreciate if you or others may dispute this one given the current lack of pictures inside the 052D, but I think this is a not unreasonable expectation. I'd be willing to elaborate on it further to defend this hypothesis if you demand it]
Armament:
-older, 48 cold launch VLS limited only to HHQ-9 LR SAM now replaced with 2 x 32 universal cold/hot launch capable VLS
-2 x 4 YJ-62s removed
-PJ-12 (type 730) CIWS aft replaced with HQ-10 SAM CIWS
-100mm gun replaced with PJ-38 130mm gun
So if I had to sum up the changes made between 052C and 052D, I think they have encompassed major structural changes in the bow of the ship, amidships, and the aft of the ship (aka the entire ship's length), and featured comprehensive upgrades in sensors, as well comprehensive upgrades in primary armament and secondary armament, and very likely combat management as well. In other words, I view the combined variety and extent of structural changes and the variety and extent upgrades in subsystems to be sufficient to confidently call it a new class.
If 052C had only been upgraded with one of those things, such as new VLS, and no other major changes, or only new radar, and no other major changes, then IMO it would not warrant the designation for a new class.
Now, I do not have any "firm" metrics to clearly delineate between what extent of changes constitutes an "upgraded variant" of an existing class, versus a "new class" altogether...
But if I had to create a metric for the context of modern major surface combatants, I'd say something like, any 3 of the below must at least be present:
-major variation in the ship's primary armament (usually VLS) in either quality (such as VLS type) or quantity (such as VLS number), with associated structural changes
-major variation to the ship's multiple secondary weapons (such as CIWS or main gun), with associated structural changes
-major variation in the ship's primary power plant [such as if a ship were upgraded from COGAG to IEPS], with associated structural changes
-major variation in the ship's primary sensor suite (usually radar system), and associated structural changes
-major variation across many of the ship's "secondary" sensor suites including sonar, ESM, secondary radars (I use "secondary" to illustrate the changes being less structurally impactful here, not to suggest that these sensors are not very important)
-major variation across the ship's internal systems, such as
-major variation in the ship's structure in a comprehensive way which is not covered by any of the above (such as in 052D's case, the new helicopter hangar structure and geometry which also integrates the RHIB davit to its structure)